Our family lives on the Crystal River just over a mile upstream from the former Crystal River millpond.
We are proud to live in Waupaca and are careful stewards of the ecology of the river.
For reasons unbeknownst to us, our family is now in a taxing authority with a dubious label of Little Hope “lake” district.
We have many questions about this new district, and we are not alone.
Why was there no direct contact from the township to its citizens on this taxing authority?
We received no survey, no calls, no direct contact on this taxing matter, except for a last- minute notice about the open meeting scheduled for two days before the final vote.
Why did the most expensive option quickly become the only option truly debated?
Keeping the dam and its growing liability is the most costly option by far.
Why not take the dam out, which is the recommendation of conservation and river ecology experts across the board, including the DNR?
Why was lake district membership mandatory rather than voluntary?
Most lake associations and districts are voluntary and are limited to residents who own property directly on the lake.
What were the criteria for inclusion in this district?
We live a mile upstream; our property is not affected by the millpond whether the dam is replaced or removed.
Some of the township board members own multiple properties on the former millpond.
Why is this not a conflict of interest when it comes to altering the tax status of Township of Dayton residents?
Our family clearly stated our opposition to this “lake” district in person at the one open meeting held two days before the vote and in writing shortly afterward.
Some of the many other residents who also objected were then exempted; we were not given that option.
This has nothing to do with the small financial increase in our taxes.
It has everything to do with elected officials railroading through a taxing authority with little regard for true open process.